Outcomes of a multicomponent safe surgery intervention in Tanzania's Lake Zone: a prospective, longitudinal study

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based strategies for improving surgical quality and patient outcomes in low-resource settings are a priority.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of a multicomponent safe surgery intervention (Safe Surgery 2020) on (1) adherence to safety practices, teamwork and communication, and documentation in patient files, and (2) incidence of maternal sepsis, postoperative sepsis, and surgical site infection.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, longitudinal study in 10 intervention and 10 control facilities in Tanzania's Lake Zone, across a 3-month pre-intervention period in 2018 and 3-month post-intervention period in 2019. SS2020 is a multicomponent intervention to support four surgical quality areas: (i) leadership and teamwork, (ii) evidence-based surgery, anesthesia and equipment sterilization practices, (iii) data completeness and (iv) infrastructure. Surgical team members received training and mentorship, and each facility received up to a $10 000 infrastructure grant. Inpatients undergoing major surgery and postpartum women were followed during their stay up to 30 days. We assessed adherence to 14 safety and teamwork and communication measures through direct observation in the operating room. We identified maternal sepsis (vaginal or cesarean delivery), postoperative sepsis and SSIs prospectively through daily surveillance and assessed medical record completeness retrospectively through chart review. We compared changes in surgical quality outcomes between intervention and control facilities using difference-in-differences analyses to determine areas of impact.

RESULTS

Safety practices improved significantly by an additional 20.5% (95% confidence interval (CI), 7.2-33.7%; P = 0.003) and teamwork and communication conversations by 33.3% (95% CI, 5.7-60.8%; P = 0.02) in intervention facilities compared to control facilities. Maternal sepsis rates reduced significantly by 1% (95% CI, 0.1-1.9%; P = 0.02). Documentation completeness improved by 41.8% (95% CI, 27.4-56.1%; P < 0.001) for sepsis and 22.3% (95% CI, 4.7-39.8%; P = 0.01) for SSIs.

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrate the benefit of the SS2020 approach. Improvement was observed in adherence to safety practices, teamwork and communication, and data quality, and there was a reduction in maternal sepsis rates. Our results support the emerging evidence that improving surgical quality in a low-resource setting requires a focus on the surgical system and culture. Investigation in diverse contexts is necessary to confirm and generalize our results and to understand how to adapt the intervention for different settings. Further work is also necessary to assess the long-term effect and sustainability of such interventions.

Gender-Based Microaggressions in Surgery: A Scoping Review of the Global Literature

BACKGROUND

In addition to systemic gender disparities, women in surgery encounter interpersonal microaggressions. The objective of this study is to describe the most common forms of microaggressions reported by women in surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review using PubMed/MEDLINE, Ovid, and Web of Science to describe the international, indexed English-language literature on gender-based microaggressions experienced by female surgeons, surgical trainees, and medical students in surgery. After screening by title, abstract, and full-text, 37 articles were retained for data extraction and analysis. Microaggressions were analyzed using the Sexist Microaggression Experience and Stress Scale (MESS) framework and stratified by country of origin.

RESULTS

Gender-based microaggression publications most commonly originated from the United States (n = 27 articles), Canada (n = 3), and India (n = 2). Gender-based microaggressions were classified into environmental invalidations (n = 20), being treated like a second-class citizen (n = 18), assumptions of traditional gender roles (n = 12), sexual objectification (n = 11), assumptions of inferiority (n = 10), being forced to leave gender at the door (n = 8), and experiencing sexist language (n = 6). Additionally, attendings were more frequently reported to experience microaggressions than surgical trainees and medical students, but more articles reported data on attendings (n = 16) than surgical trainees (n = 10) or students (n = 4).

CONCLUSION

While recent advancements have opened the field of surgery to women, there is still a lack of female representation, and persistent microaggressions may perpetuate this gender disparity. Addressing microaggressions against female surgeons is essential to achieving gender equity in surgical practice.

Improving surgical quality in low-income and middle-income countries: why do some health facilities perform better than others?

BACKGROUND

Evidence on heterogeneity in outcomes of surgical quality interventions in low-income and middle-income countries is limited. We explored factors driving performance in the Safe Surgery 2020 intervention in Tanzania's Lake Zone to distil implementation lessons for low-resource settings.

METHODS

We identified higher (n=3) and lower (n=3) performers from quantitative data on improvement from 14 safety and teamwork and communication indicators at 0 and 12 months from 10 intervention facilities, using a positive deviance framework. From 72 key informant interviews with surgical providers across facilities at 1, 6 and 12 months, we used a grounded theory approach to identify practices of higher and lower performers.

RESULTS

Performance experiences of higher and lower performers differed on the following themes: (1) preintervention context, (2) engagement with Safe Surgery 2020 interventions, (3) teamwork and communication orientation, (4) collective learning orientation, (5) role of leadership, and (6) perceived impact of Safe Surgery 2020 and beyond. Higher performers had a culture of teamwork which helped them capitalise on Safe Surgery 2020 to improve surgical ecosystems holistically on safety practices, teamwork and communication. Lower performers prioritised overhauling safety practices and began considering organisational cultural changes much later. Thus, while also improving, lower performers prioritised different goals and trailed higher performers on the change continuum.

CONCLUSION

Future interventions should be tailored to facility context and invest in strengthening teamwork, communication and collective learning and facilitate leadership engagement to build a receptive climate for successful implementation of safe surgery interventions.

In-Hospital Postoperative Mortality Rates for Selected Procedures in Tanzania's Lake Zone

Background

Postoperative mortality rate is one of six surgical indicators identified by the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery for monitoring access to high-quality surgical care. The primary aim of this study was to measure the postoperative mortality rate in Tanzania’s Lake Zone to provide a baseline for surgical strengthening efforts. The secondary aim was to measure the effect of Safe Surgery 2020, a multi-component intervention to improve surgical quality, on postoperative mortality after 10 months.

Methods

We prospectively collected data on postoperative mortality from 20 health centers, district hospitals, and regional hospitals in Tanzania’s Lake Zone over two time periods: pre-intervention (February to April 2018) and post-intervention (March to May 2019). We analyzed postoperative mortality rates by procedure type. We used logistic regression to determine the impact of Safe Surgery 2020 on postoperative mortality.

Results

The overall average in-hospital non-obstetric postoperative mortality rate for all surgery procedures was 2.62%. The postoperative mortality rates for laparotomy were 3.92% and for cesarean delivery was 0.24%. Logistic regression demonstrated no difference in the postoperative mortality rate after the Safe Surgery 2020 intervention.

Conclusions

Our results inform national surgical planning in Tanzania by providing a sub-national baseline estimate of postoperative mortality rates for multiple surgical procedures and serve as a basis from which to measure the impact of future surgical quality interventions. Our study showed no improvement in postoperative mortality after implementation of Safe Surgery 2020, possibly due to low power to detect change.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00268-020-05802-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Globalization of national surgical, obstetric and anesthesia plans: the critical link between health policy and action in global surgery

Efforts from the developed world to improve surgical, anesthesia and obstetric care in low- and middle-income countries have evolved from a primarily volunteer mission trip model to a sustainable health system strengthening approach as private and public stakeholders recognize the enormous health toll and financial burden of surgical disease. The National Surgical, Obstetric and Anesthesia Plan (NSOAP) has been developed as a policy strategy for countries to address, in part, the health burden of diseases amenable to surgical care, but these plans have not developed in isolation. The NSOAP has become a phenomenon of globalization as a broad range of partners - individuals and institutions - help in both NSOAP formulation, implementation and financing. As the nexus between policy and action in the field of global surgery, the NSOAP reflects a special commitment by state actors to make progress on global goals such as Universal Health Coverage and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. This requires a continued global commitment involving genuine partnerships that embrace the collective strengths of both national and global actors to deliver sustained, safe and affordable high-quality surgical care for all poor, rural and marginalized people.